sfcole Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 <p>How is it scanned? This does play a role.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 9, 2011 Author Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>Scott, I'm not sure I understand your question. Scanned looks like the scans I posted. <br> Very nice in my opinion.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 9, 2011 Author Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>To Dave's comment, I can confirm now that the new Portra shows no grain at 11x14.</p> <p>This makes plenty fine for most applications while offering huge dynamic range and sharpness at 400 iso.</p> <p>Nice work Kodak.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>I'm liking this film. I just got my first rolls back - all lab scanned. Haven't had a chance to do it myself.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Luttmann Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>That's pretty much the deal breaker for me Mauro. My album prints never go bigger than 11x14. Portra is grain free at that size. Even a 16x24 will look darn good. My F5s are gonna be eating a lot of the film!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>I may well have missed it in previous discussions, but is anyone noticing any difference in palette/hue as compared with the Portra 400NC?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Luttmann Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>The hue seems a tad bid warmer....especially when overexposed. Colors seems a little brighter, but not much. Skin tones very good.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>A bit more saturation, in the reds particularly I feel, compared to 400NC, but nothing serious. Great skin tones.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 <p>Thanks guys, that sounds good! I couldn't seem to resist stocking up just a bit with NC before this new emulsion was available; love NC's rendition. But I look forward to the new version, too, after seeing and hearing about it here.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>I hope it doesn't disappoint you Dave. I was afraid the 7D was keeping you in a monogamous relationship.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Jeff, my observation is that skin colors look dead on for a Vanity Fair cover with flash. </p> <p>Outdoors depending the time of the day it may have a hint of yellowish warmth.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>I shot a concert with Portra 400 and TMAX 400 at 1600. I will try to post some crops and comments next week.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Yeah, the skin tones are great I think. This was shot in late afternoon light. Maybe 1.5-2 hours before sunset?</p> <p><a title=". by ezwal, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5220/5429796443_cbd43cb631.jpg" alt="." width="500" height="332" /></a></p> <p>I'd like to see your concert shots, so definitely post them.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Wow Tim. That looks fantastic! What a 30 megapixel scan from 35mm!!! Excellent.</p> <p>Is that a Noritsu scan? Not too shabby.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>My Canon 100mm f2 is going to be Portra's permanent friend. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>First time I've gotten scans from Precision Camera. They are running a special for rangefinderforum members. $12/roll for these scans with free development. My Coolscan will sit unused for color for the near future. I think they are using a Noritsu.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>They (and you) did a fabulous job. Were you able to compare their scans to a Coolscan 9000?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>I don't have a Coolscan 9000, but I do have a V. At some point, I'll rescan a couple at 4000 dpi to see what I come up with. Probably next week some time.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Mauro, Thanks for the good input! I'll be very interested in your results and thoughts on rating it higher for your concert images. As you might well know, and if memory serves, not too long ago on the Figital Revolution site, it was mentioned that this new Portra 400 could be rated higher with good results. Of course, I suppose how it compares with the actual higher speed films will be important. I really look forward to your post on this.</p> <p>Tim, I'll second that "Wow"; an absolutely gorgeous shot in all respects, especially the skin tones!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim gray Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Thanks for the kind comments!</p> <p>In my limited experience, rating it faster and processing normally gave roughly the same results as with 400NC and 400VC. Possibly an incremental improvement, but not revolutionary. Portra 800 is still going to give you more speed. As far as which people prefer, it probably comes down to whether or not people can get along with the grain in Portra 800 - which is manageable, but larger than 400. I personally would probably shoot 800 when I need higher speed film.</p> <p>I did not push process, didn't scan at home, and didn't really work the images hard in PS. It also wasn't the most controlled test, just a bit of playing around on a Sunday afternoon. I do intend to try out a roll with a push and compare it to Portra 800. Another time though.</p> <p>It would be great if Portra 800 got the grain improvement that 400 did.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Here is the first scan from the concert.</p> <p>Sadly, (I experimented trying to have Target push the film for me) I believe they pushed it several stops. The film looks good but I can't really rate whether it is EI 800, 1600, 3200 or 6400.</p> <p>Here is a boot closeup. This shot is good to look at the grain in the dark detail-less areas. Also to observe the freaking awesome detail Portra 400 captures in the pants.</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 10, 2011 Author Share Posted February 10, 2011 <p>Here you can inspect it at 4000 dpi at 100%. I just noticed a crawler on the carpet under the boot of the guitar player - ouch.</p> <p>http://shutterclick.smugmug.com/Photography/Portra-400-Test/15789423_WvenE#1183926824_jrcxC-O-LB</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_ma Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 <p>wow, the details in the scan is just amazing!</p> <p>I just shot my first roll of Portra 400 on a short trip to Orlando. Really impressed with the color, clarity and lack of the grain. I think it is catching up on Portra 160 film.</p> <p>One more thing I noticed about the new Ektar and Portra compared to the old ones like Ultracolor is that it is much easier to get rid of the film curl from the new film and keep it flat for scanning. I had a much harder time to put some freshly processed 35mm Ultra Color 400 negative into my scanner carrier. Is that just my imagination? or did Kodak improve the film base in the new film?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauro_franic Posted February 12, 2011 Author Share Posted February 12, 2011 <p>Here is George Lynch (Portra 400 - EI 1600). Focus point was on the front cheek (missed the eye)</p> <p>4000 dpi 100%<br> http://shutterclick.smugmug.com/Photography/Portra-400-Test/15789423_WvenE#1185209323_7RXzY-O-LB</p> <p> </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User_4136860 Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 <p>Unfortunately I have A freezer full of Portra NC and VC in 35mm and 120 enough to last me several years to get through first.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now